Re: HHH(DDD) is correct to reject its input as non-halting --- EVIDENCE THAT I AM CORRECT

On 6/28/2025 6:56 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-06-27 14:26:41 +0000, olcott said:
 

On 6/27/2025 1:42 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-06-27 04:21:01 +0000, olcott said:
>

On 6/26/2025 5:20 AM, Mikko wrote:>>>

In computer science the only measure of non-halting is the
possibility to execute an unlimited number of steps without
halting. An execution of a limited number of steps does not
count as non-haltign.

>
Halting means reaching a final halt state.

>
And non-halting means unlimited execution.

>
Not at all. The measure has always been can't possibly reach
final halt state.

 In Post's simplified version, which is the most commonly used one,
a computation halts when there is no applicable rule to specify
the next action.
 

It is best to use the standard measure of halting
as reaching a final halt state. If we don't do this
then we get psychotic ideas like Richard's that we
cannot know that a computation does not halt until
after we simulate it forever.
--
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer